Discovery of oncogenic ROS1 missense mutations with sensitivity to tyrosine kinase inhibitors

Exploring the Profiles of ROS1 Tyrosine Kinase: A Structural Analysis of G2032R and D2033N Mutations

Background

ROS1, a proto-oncogene, drives cancer through chromosomal fusions. The G2032R and D2033N mutations, common in ROS1-rearranged non-small cell lung cancer, hinder crizotinib treatment. We investigate these mutations' impact on ROS1 structure through molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, revealing destabilization. Our findings shed light on how these mutations contribute to cancer development.

Materials and Methods

The crystal structure of human ROS1 (PDB ID: 7z5x) served as the template for homology modeling and further mutation insertion of G2032R and D2033N substitutions introduced using Swiss-PdbViewer. The MD simulations were conducted on the wild-type (WT) and mutant ROS1 kinase domains to explore the structural changes and interactions.

Results

The initial model of the human ROS1 crystal structure was constructed, incorporating missing loop residues and then utilized for the MD simulation studies. The examination of conformational changes in WT, G2032R, and D2033N mutant ROS1 proteins involved observing alterations in the C-alpha protein. We observed that the mutations resulted in deviations in the MD trajectory over the 500 ns period. Consequently, the MD simulations unveiled significant conformational changes induced by the G2032R and D2033N mutations, affecting protein stability and dynamics, particularly in regions such as the ATP binding and active sites.

Conclusion

Our study constructed an initial model of the human ROS1 and used it for MD simulation studies to examine the conformational changes in ROS1 mutants. Notably, our observations revealed that the mutations caused deviations in the MD trajectory. The G2032R and D2033N mutations significantly alter ROS1 structure, affecting its stability and dynamics, offering key insights into their role in cancer disease development.

Kinase Inhibitors and Kinase-Targeted Cancer Therapies: Recent Advances and Future Perspectives

Over 120 small-molecule kinase inhibitors (SMKIs) have been approved worldwide for treating various diseases, with nearly 70 FDA approvals specifically for cancer treatment, focusing on targets like the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) family. Kinase-targeted strategies encompass monoclonal antibodies and their derivatives, such as nanobodies and peptides, along with innovative approaches like the use of kinase degraders and protein kinase interaction inhibitors, which have recently demonstrated clinical progress and potential in overcoming resistance. Nevertheless, kinase-targeted strategies encounter significant hurdles, including drug resistance, which greatly impacts the clinical benefits for cancer patients, as well as concerning toxicity when combined with immunotherapy, which restricts the full utilization of current treatment modalities. Despite these challenges, the development of kinase inhibitors remains highly promising. The extensively studied tyrosine kinase family has 70% of its targets in various stages of development, while 30% of the kinase family remains inadequately explored. Computational technologies play a vital role in accelerating the development of novel kinase inhibitors and repurposing existing drugs. Recent FDA-approved SMKIs underscore the importance of blood-brain barrier permeability for long-term patient benefits. This review provides a comprehensive summary of recent FDA-approved SMKIs based on their mechanisms of action and targets. We summarize the latest developments in potential new targets and explore emerging kinase inhibition strategies from a clinical perspective. Lastly, we outline current obstacles and future prospects in kinase inhibition.

CRISPR/Cas9-edited ROS1 + non-small cell lung cancer cell lines highlight differential drug sensitivity in 2D vs 3D cultures while reflecting established resistance profiles

INTRODUCTION

The study of resistance-causing mutations in oncogene-driven tumors is fundamental to guide clinical decisions. Several point mutations affecting the ROS1 kinase domain have been identified in the clinical setting, but their impact requires further exploration, particularly in improved pre-clinical models. Given the scarcity of solid pre-clinical models to approach rare cancer subtypes like ROS1 + NSCLC, CRISPR/Cas9 technology allows the introduction of mutations in patient-derived cell lines for which resistant variants are difficult to obtain due to the low prevalence of cases within the clinical setting.

METHODS

In the SLC34A2-ROS1 rearranged NSCLC cell line HCC78, we knocked-in through CRISPR/Cas9 technology three ROS1 drug resistance-causing mutations: G2032R, L2026M and S1986Y. Such variants are located in different functional regions of the ROS1 kinase domain, thus conferring TKI resistance through distinct mechanisms. We then performed pharmacological assays in 2D and 3D to assess the cellular response of the mutant lines to crizotinib, entrectinib, lorlatinib, repotrectinib and ceritinib. In addition, immunoblotting assays were performed in 2D-treated cell lines to determine ROS1 phosphorylation and MAP kinase pathway activity. The area over the curve (AOC) defined by the normalized growth rate (NGR_fit) dose-response curves was the variable used to quantify the cellular response towards TKIs.

RESULTS

Spheroids derived from ROS1G2032R cells were significantly more resistant to repotrectinib (AOC fold change = - 7.33), lorlatinib (AOC fold change = - 6.17), ceritinib (AOC fold change = - 2.8) and entrectinib (AOC fold change = - 2.02) than wild type cells. The same cells cultured as a monolayer reflected the inefficacy of crizotinib (AOC fold change = - 2.35), entrectinib (AOC fold change = - 2.44) and ceritinib (AOC fold change = - 2.12) in targeting the ROS1 G2032R mutation. ROS1L2026M cells showed also remarkable resistance both in monolayer and spheroid culture compared to wild type cells, particularly against repotrectinib (spheroid AOC fold change = - 2.19) and entrectinib (spheroid AOC fold change = - 1.98). ROS1S1986Y cells were resistant only towards crizotinib in 2D (AOC fold change = - 1.86). Overall, spheroids showed an increased TKI sensitivity compared to 2D cultures, where the impact of each mutation that confers TKI resistance could be clearly distinguished. Western blotting assays qualitatively reflected the patterns of response towards TKI observed in 2D culture through the levels of phosphorylated-ROS1. However, we observed a dose-response increase of phosphorylated-Erk1/2, suggesting the involvement of the MAPK pathway in the mediation of apoptosis in HCC78 cells.

CONCLUSION

In this study we knock-in for the first time in a ROS1 + patient-derived cell line, three different known resistance-causing mutations using CRISPR/Cas9 in the endogenous translocated ROS1 alleles. Pharmacological assays performed in 2D and 3D cell culture revealed that spheroids are more sensitive to TKIs than cells cultured as a monolayer. This direct comparison between two culture systems could be done thanks to the implementation of normalized growth rates (NGR) to uniformly quantify drug response between 2D and 3D cell culture. Overall, this study presents the added value of using spheroids and positions lorlatinib and repotrectinib as the most effective TKIs against the studied ROS1 resistance point mutations.